A Wake-Up Call to PASSHE Students, Parents and Alumni Donors

“Thoughts on the Future of Higher Education”

 My weekly blog began under the above title more than three years ago on December 3, 2012.

 
Regular readers surely noticed that every one of my 168 weekly posts since that day has focused on so-called “public higher education” in Pennsylvania, often by comparing it to its counterparts across America.

Quotation marks and the use of “so-called” are needed because the word “public” continues to be widely used today, despite the fact that the reality behind the word “public” has changed tremendously since its introduction almost two centuries ago.    
 
“Public higher education in America” began in the 1830s with the idea it should be free to the students—or at the very least highly subsidized by the State—in order to make it accessible to all qualified students.
 
In fact the word “public,” whether applied to K-12 or to higher education, referred to the public, that is, taxpayer funds that would be used to finance “public education.”
 
In those early days, “public education” of both types—whether K12 or higher education—was considered a “public good,” meaning that all taxpayers would be required to support it financially through their taxes, whether or not those taxpayers had children who could benefit directly from public education.
 
The unspoken premise was that even these taxpayers would still benefit, although perhaps indirectly. 
 
While individual State histories RE “public” higher education vary widely, the overall pattern is very clear:
 
·         Public K-12 schools in America continue to be “free” to the students who attend them, but “public higher education” in America today is anything but free to the students.  It is now seen as a “private good,” primarily benefitting the students themselves, rather than the larger society. 

·         The two main sources of funding for public higher education today are State Appropriation (provided by State tax receipts) and Net Tuition (provided by students, parents and alumni donors).

·         Today in America, not one of the 50 states provides free public higher education to its citizens!

·         In addition, only a few states today provide “highly subsidized public higher education.  In 2014, the most generous of these states included Wyoming, with the highest level of State support (84.9%), followed by California, Alaska, New Mexico and North Carolina.

·         The least generous in terms of public higher education funding included Vermont with the lowest level of State support (15.5%), followed by New Hampshire, Delaware, Colorado and Pennsylvania. ¹

 

The Politics of Public Higher Education in Pennsylvania

Pennsylvania’s history with regard to public higher education funding was similar to that of most other states back in the mid-nineteenth century—by featuring highly subsidized public higher education. For example, by 1950 Pennsylvania was providing about 90% of the cost of education at its “State-owned” institutions of higher education, which would later become known as fourteen PASSHE universities, including: Bloomsburg, California, Cheyney, Clarion, East Stroudsburg, Edinboro, Indiana, Kutztown, Lock Haven, Mansfield, Millersville, Shippensburg, Slippery Rock and West Chester.

But in the decades after 1950, Pennsylvania’s annual funding percentage to these institutions trended rapidly downward, from 90% in 1950, to 75% in 1968, to 63% in 1984, to 49% in 1993, and to 25% today.
 
Because of the drop in State funding, the PASSHE students, parents and alumni donors—who together pay the balance of the actual costs of education not covered by State appropriation—have seen their share of the cost explode from 10% in 1950, to 25% in 1968, to 37% in 1983, to 51% in 1993, and to 75% today.

Pennsylvania’s Privatization of “Public” Higher Education

Although our elected and appointed State officials—and the media—continue to refer to the fourteen PASSHE universities as Pennsylvania’s “public” universities, they are actually public in name only.
 
This continuing use of a false label—by calling the PASSHE universities “public”—persists due to a combination of factors including a correctible ignorance on the one hand, and incorrigible political mischief on the other.
 
As an example of correctable ignorance, PASSHE students, parents and alumni donors are largely unaware of the fact that their best interests as PASSHE’s Majority Financial Stakeholders are being consciously ignored by the State’s elected and appointed officials, especially those on the PASSHE Board of Governors.
 
As to incorrigible political mischief, the strategy of the elected and appointed officials in this case is aided by the continuing to use the word “public” to define the fourteen PASSHE universities when, in reality they are anything but public, but calling them “public” helps to keep Pennsylvania citizens ignorant of that fact. 
 
Their strategy goes back to Lincoln’s Question: “If you call a tail a leg, how many legs does a dog have?”

Answer: “Four.  Calling a tail a leg doesn’t make it a leg.” 

We’ve seen how PASSHE officials have worked hard to call future liabilities current liabilities in an effort to deflect legitimate criticism about the enormous size of its various “fund balances.”

 
Whether one calls “a tail a leg,” or “future liabilities current liabilities,” or “75% private universities public universities,” the apparent motivation in each case is the same (deception), and the inevitable outcome of that effort must also the same (deception exposed).     
 

A Wake-Up Call to PASSHE Students, Parents and Alumni Donors

 
One goal of this first in a series of blog posts under the above heading is to provide useful information to PASSHE students, parents and alumni donors about how, since 2002, the PASSHE Board of Governors has been advancing its own best interests at the expense of your best interests, which are quite different.  Don’t take my word for it—look at the evidence and decide for yourselves!
 
A second goal is to suggest how that information may be used to secure a major voting share for PASSHE students, parents and alumni donors within PASSHE’s governance structure, one that would be roughly comparable to your 75% majority funding share of PASSHE’s annual revenue.

Currently the State, in the person of its elected and appointed officials, provides 25% of PASSHE’s annual funding and yet controls 100% of its governance seats!  Is there any doubt as to why your best interests are being ignored? 
 
To be continued.
¹ http://www.sheeo.org/sites/default/files/Figure%209.jpg.